Stop the Presses - Durova, WP Press Officer, Calls Congress (and, Does she not have a real job? Options

Entries on Wikipedia edited by Davis aide
Knoxville News Sentinel (subscription), TN - Aug 10, 2007
A Wikipedia spokesman confirmed the article had been written by one of its volunteer administrator/editors, who uses the pen name Durova. ... (urp, vomit reflux just happening)

A Wikipedia spokesman confirmed the article had been written by one of its volunteer administrator/editors, who uses the pen name Durova. In a telephone interview, she identified herself as Lise Broer of San Diego. Broer said Wikipedia has paid particular attention to submissions from congressional office computers since a “scandal” in 2006 over revisions to biographies of several members of Congress. In general, the revisions would delete negative information, such as broken campaign promises, and replace it with more favorable information.

Interesting. I wonder if the Foundation gave her name out, and phone number. I was thinking that she called them herself, but this time, it looks like she got a call independantly.

If she was just a normal admin, it would be a big deal for her to get interviewed once or twice (Swatjester comes to mind). But she doesn't just get interviewed. She actively calls journalists on her own initiative. She's a recidivist. Her focus on the removal of defamation, which is her own personal speciality to do to users, is pathological. Reminds me of the recent news about an outspoken anti-gay pundit Minister, who got caught offering a cop a blowjob. Same logic. Durova giving advice on how to avoid defamation is much like all those bible-beating preachers who wind up caught in bed with five hookers.

So how do you get her? Most news persons don't pay attention to who they are interviewing, and she comes off as sane if you don't follow her daily routine.

Durova apparently leaked Illena Rosenthal's name online, in an Wikipedia arbitration session, when it was previously obscured by Rosenthal's login. I got that off a random Google just now. Didn't she also have something to do with the latest Brandt undeletions of his AFDs? And she has the nerve to write articles inviting businesses (and now Congressional offices) to edit Wikipedia - albeit with pre-declared conflict of interest, so they have to lick her boots? (Thats what she wants - them to come ask her for help, yech. Maybe they should all go read her ED article before going there).

Today she has a Tennessee Congressman's office APOLOGIZING FOR NOT FOLLOWING WIKI-RULES. The roils bile in the belly. Also, this is a missed golden opportunity for a lawmaker to see the damage that Wikipedia could do - but instead of realizing how they damage normal people, he apologizes for being a government official who didn't follow policy. Was the policy ever made clear NOPE. But of course, in the Congressman's office, the policy is to apologize for any potential misdeed. This is appalling, of course. What to do? Suggestions, anyone? Task force team leader? Kohs? Aren't you the designated WR press officer (j/k, but isn't she sort of your anti-favorite person?).

Is anyone on WR good at writing articles? Could they follow-on to some of this nonsense with a reality check, of a better article, with the full monty?

As a side point, Durova is now 'outing' her own name (in the Knoxville article). Guess she's over the pseudonomomomous thing already.

This post has been edited by Disillusioned Lackey: Wed 15th August 2007, 11:48am

I've always been a great believer in following rules.

A number of members of my family (on my father's side at least) have been politically active. My grandmother always told me "Whatever you do, protest it within the law, not outside of the law".

I have never broken any law. Not on purpose at least. And when I play any game, go to any internet place, I never break the rules of the place.

I think that people who break the rules, or break the law, in protest, are despicable.

EDIT: Obviously I didn't mean that anyone who is convicted of breaking a really stupid law is EVIL. I have a lot of sympathy for them. In some cases, you have no choice, because otherwise you would die, or someone you know would die. That's obviously not what I was talking about, and I think its rather idiotic to suggest that I was. But at the same time, you are most definitely better off to stay within the law. I stand by that.

And if anyone thinks that my refusing to ever break any law, or rule, in any game, any forum, anywhere on the internet, or anywhere in life, makes me JUST AS BAD AS A NAZI then fuck you with a big capital FUCK YOU! I mean seriously, to jump from that to something else is just absurd.

I was quite obviously talking about people on Wikipedia, who go in there and create multiple sock puppets or who are incivil, or who make legal threats, or break any rule that they have that is stupid. We are much better off to protest it from within the rules. And if you go around making legal threat after legal threat just to prove a point, and get yourself banned, then you're a troll, and you deserve to get banned.

And if it makes me evil because I've dared to suggest that being a law-abiding citizen is a good thing, then you can get fucked quite frankly. I am not going to break laws just because you say that its evil not to.

I think that people who break the rules, or break the law, in protest, are despicable.

Tell that to Sophie Scholl. I think people who make absolute statements that fly in the face of logic and all of human history, are not qualified to engage in a meaningful discussion.

I think that people who break the rules, or break the law, in protest, are despicable.

Tell that to Sophie Scholl. I think people who make absolute statements that fly in the face of logic and all of human history, are not qualified to engage in a meaningful discussion.

What rule did Sophie break ??? —

Godwin's Asymptotically Not Exactly Fascist (GANEF's) Law ???

Jonny

What rule did Sophie break ??? —

Godwin's Asymptotically Not Exactly Fascist (GANEF's) Law ???

Jonny

In the words of child psychologist, Alice Miller, quoted in the article on Sophie School: The rule they broke was: Thou Shalt Not be Aware

the tolerant and open atmosphere of their [Sophie and Hans Scholl’s] childhood had enabled them to see through Hitler’s platitudes at the Nuremberg Rally, when the brother and sister were members of Nazi youth organizations. Nearly all their peers were completely won over by the Führer, whereas Hans and Sophie had other, higher expectations of human nature, not shared by their comrades, against which they could measure Hitler. Because such standards are rare, it is also very difficult for patients in therapy to see through the manipulative methods they are subjected to; the patient does not even notice such methods because they are inherent in a system he takes completely for granted.

I find this an amazingly ironic reference to be found in a Wikipedia article, because it perfectly describes Wikipedian culture, and how such awful things go on there, with group approval. If you are psychologically unaware (possibly have your own issues), such extreme treatment is normal, so you don't think twice when a Wikipedia attack ruins someone's life. People who speak out on Wikipedia, against such practices, usually wind up being banned. The rest of the people, who dislike it, are very, very quiet about their disagreement (such a venting or complaining off-wiki, in emails) and publicly make no statement. In short, the Wikipedia culture is much about fear.

Also much like conformity required under oppressive regimes. But then, didn't they start out calling themselves dictator and cabal? Apologies to Godwin's law, but they said it first.